From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd
Why think of an original topic when I can just leech off somebody
else's ideas? This time, I'm riffing off a video I saw on YouTube.
This video, specifically:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyl73XLJWhE
* * * *
To save yourself a watch, the presenter suggests that the reason
modern tabletop gamers don't like dungeon crawls is because the
current rules lack the time management that makes them fun.
Now, I can't argue this case, because:
a) I've no idea what 'modern tabletop gamers' like, and
b) I'm not familiar enough with 5E to say whether it does
or does not promote time-management in this way.
I'm not entirely sure I agree with his solution of having time being a
finite resource and using strict time-keeping to keep the players on
their toes and occupied. I don't necessarily disagree with it either;
I just don't think it's as cut-and-dried as he makes out.
Mostly, I just wanted to use his video as a springboard to... well, I
was going to say discuss D&D dungeoneering, but let's be honest; that
implies I've any sort of thesis to my comments. Mostly, I just wanted
to ramble about the game. ;-)
* * * *
I myself have never entirely been a fan of dungeon crawls, though...
and this has nothing to do with the rules. Honestly, it's just that
I've always thought of them as too mechanical and unrealistic for my
taste. These huge multi-leveled underground labyrinths filled with
countless monsters that can take days for a D&D strike team to clear?
My first thought is always: who the hell is building these things?
Digging through dirt and stone is HARD even with modern technology
(not to mention expensive). Ancient and Medieval diggers would do the
minimum necessary; they wouldn't be creating entire underworld cities
with superfluous chambers, not when it was so much easier just to
build it above ground.
[Yeah, sure; dwarves and Stone-to-mud spells and all that.
It makes it easier. But even taking that into consideration,
some of the sprawls featured in old AD&D modules beggared
the imagination.]
So I tended to use dungeons much more sparingly; they were infrequent
and --when encountered-- much smaller. They also were much more
focused; rarely were they of the "just go and find treasure" sort;
characters entered them with a very specific goal in mind: get the
magic gewgaw or locate the evil foozle. The dungeons themselves tended
to be more straight-forward; they weren't vast mazes because the
people who built them and lived in them did so with a purpose, and
thus kept to a fairly restricted area. Which meant the players didn't
have huge expanses to endlessly explore: in my adventures, they didn't
spend as much time underground.
Not to say the other way is wrong, or my way is better (or worse).
It's just the way I --because of my biases-- tended to create and
present dungeons. The crawl wasn't a major part of the campaign.
As such, we didn't suffer from as many problems as (apparently) modern
gamers have with crawls. To be sure, I also didn't let players rely so
heavily on skills and dice rolls when exploring so the problem of
repetitive "I search the square for traps" with every move was never
that big a problem.
[Of course, because of how I designed my dungeons, traps
weren't that common either. As mentioned, most dungeons
the players explored were places that other creatures lived
in... and even goblins don't want to have leap over
pit-traps every time they scamper between the sleeping chamber
and privies! Mechanical traps were fairly rare in my
adventures]
Anyway, I was much more hands on with that sort of stuff. Even if the
dice roll said you found a trap, I'd only give the players minimal
information about what the trap did. They'd have to deduce the what
and how of the mechanics of the snare, and how to bypass it.
I agree with the time management stuff, though. That was always an
important part of my campaigns, both above and below ground. I always
tried to create a reactive world, with monsters and NPCs always moving
about. I wasn't so strict with the time-keeping, however. I never went
so far as, say, insisting that ten turns after a party enters a
dungeon, kobold troop passes through room C, or even that the players
only have thirty turns before their presence in the dungeon is noted.
Heck, I was fairly lenient in timekeeping altogether; a search of one
room might take five minutes (half a turn) if its small and fairly
empty, but twenty minutes if it's bigger and more cluttered. When
asked about how long things were taking overall, I usually answered in
terms of half-hours or hours, and even that had some leeway to either
sides.
Which isn't to say time wasn't an important factor. There almost
always was some pressure that meant the players had to keep moving.
The idea that players could, for example, just hole up for eight hours
in the dungeon? Never happened in my campaigns. You just never got
that sort of freedom (get out of the dungeon first, you fools! But
before you criticize, remember that my dungeons were small). I kept
track of time, but it was always more organic rather than tightly tied
to some table.
[There were some exceptions. I remember one dungeon that
was hermetically sealed, so oxygen was an issue and I had
to keep close watch on the time. I hated that crawl for
that reason.]
Ultimately, like all tabletop RPGs, I don't think there's any one
answer on how to 'best' manage a crawl. It really all depends on your
players. Some people like the turn-by-turn management, others find it
too binding and mechanical. Some gamers love the crawl for what it is;
some (like myself!) can't stomach its unrealism. There's no
one-size-fits-all solution to the problem and --while I don't
necessarily disagree with the video-- do dislike his idea that 'if you
just follow these ten tips, everyone will love dungeon crawls!' idea.
Rather, listen to his ideas and pick the ones you think will best suit
your players' tastes. Because even the best-run crawls may go poorly
if your players just don't like dungeon crawls.
* * * *
How did you run your dungeon crawls? Was dungeoneering a major part of
your adventures?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2